MFDA Hearing Panel issues Reasons for Decision in the matter of William Adams
TORONTO, March 24, 2015 /CNW/ - A Hearing Panel of the Central Regional Council of the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada ("MFDA") has issued its Reasons for Decision in connection with a settlement hearing held in Toronto, Ontario on March 9, 2015 in the matter of William Morris Adams (the "Respondent"). The Reasons for Decision relate to the Hearing Panel's acceptance of the settlement agreement (the "Settlement Agreement") entered into between the Respondent and Staff of the MFDA. In its Reasons for Decision dated March 18, 2015, the Hearing Panel confirmed the sanctions imposed on the Respondent:
- has paid a fine in the amount of $17,500;
- has paid costs of in the amount of $7,500;
- shall successfully complete an industry compliance course acceptable to the MFDA within six (6) months of the date that the Settlement Agreement is accepted by the Hearing Panel; and
- shall in future comply with all MFDA By-laws, Rules and Policies, and all applicable securities legislation and regulations.
In the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent admitted that:
| a) |
between October 2008 and December 2008, he signed new account opening documents as the mutual fund salesperson responsible for the accounts of at least 12 clients, without having ever met with the clients, thereby failing to perform the necessary due diligence to learn the essential facts relative to the clients and failing to observe high standards of ethics and practice in the conduct of business, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1; and |
|
| b) |
between March 2007 and August 2008, he obtained blank, pre-signed new account opening forms and investment loan applications from at least 13 clients, which he forwarded to a third party to complete and submit to the Member in order to open accounts for the clients and implement a leveraged investment strategy in the accounts, and in so doing: |
|
| i. |
facilitated an arrangement whereby the third party populated the new account opening documents and investment loan applications with client information which was false, incorrect or misleading, thereby failing to observe high standards of ethics and conduct in the transaction of business and engaging in conduct unbecoming an Approved Person, contrary to MFDA Rule 2.1.1; and |
|
| ii. |
failed to ensure that the leveraged investment strategy was suitable for the clients and in keeping with the clients' investment objectives, contrary to MFDA Rules 2.2.1 and 2.1.1. |
|
Copies of the Reasons for Decision and the Settlement Agreement are available on the MFDA website at www.mfda.ca. During the period described in the Reasons for Decision, the Respondent carried on business out of a branch office located in Ottawa, Ontario.
The MFDA is the self-regulatory organization for Canadian mutual fund dealers, regulating the operations, standards of practice and business conduct of its 105 Members and their approximately 80,000 Approved Persons with a mandate to protect investors and the public interest. For more information about the MFDA's complaint and enforcement processes, as well as links to 'Check an Advisor' and other Investor Tools, visit the For Investors page on the MFDA website.
SOURCE Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada
Hugh Corbett, Managing Director, Enforcement, 416-943-4685, [email protected]
Share this article